Bowel preparation for elective colorectal resection: multi-treatment machine learning analysis on 6241 cases from a prospective Italian cohort.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence concerning bowel preparation before elective colorectal surgery is still controversial. This study aimed to compare the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL), surgical site infections (SSIs), and overall morbidity (any adverse event, OM) after elective colorectal surgery using four different types of bowel preparation. METHODS: A prospective database gathered among 78 Italian surgical centers in two prospective studies, including 6241 patients who underwent elective colorectal resection with anastomosis for malignant or benign disease, was re-analyzed through a multi-treatment machine-learning model considering no bowel preparation (NBP; No. = 3742; 60.0%) as the reference treatment arm, compared to oral antibiotics alone (oA; No. = 406; 6.5%), mechanical bowel preparation alone (MBP; No. = 1486; 23.8%), or in combination with oAB (MoABP; No. = 607; 9.7%). Twenty covariates related to biometric data, surgical procedures, perioperative management, and hospital/center data potentially affecting outcomes were included and balanced into the model. The primary endpoints were AL, SSIs, and OM. All the results were reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Compared to NBP, MBP showed significantly higher AL risk (OR 1.82; 95% CI 1.23-2.71; p = .003) and OM risk (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.10-1.72; p = .005), no significant differences for all the endpoints were recorded in the oA group, whereas MoABP showed a significantly reduced SSI risk (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.25-0.79; p = .008). CONCLUSIONS: MoABP significantly reduced the SSI risk after elective colorectal surgery, therefore representing a valid alternative to NBP.

Right-sided colonic diverticulitis. Short and long-term surgical outcomes and 2-year quality of life.

AIM: We aimed to investigate the short and the long-term outcomes and 2-year Quality of Life (QoL) of patients with right-sided colonic diverticulitis (RCD) surgically managed. METHOD: We conducted an ambidirectional cohort study of patients with RCD undergoing surgery between 2012/2022. A colonoscopy was performed at 1-year post surgery. The enrolled patients completed the EuroQoL (EQ-5D-3L) during a regular follow-up visit at 12 and 24 months after surgery. RESULTS: Three hundred nineteen patients with RCD were selected: 223 (70%) patients were treated by non-operative management (NOM) while 33 underwent surgery. Acute diverticulitis occurred in 30 patients: 9 (27.2%) were classified by CT as uncomplicated and 21 (63.6%) as complicated diverticulitis. Additionally, chronic diverticulitis occurred in 3 cases (9.2%). Specifically, 27 patients were classified by CT as 1a (81.8%) and 6 patients as 3 (18.2%). Right hemicolectomy was performed in 30 patients (90.8%), and ileo-caecectomy in 3 (9.2%). Nine (27.27%) experienced postoperative complications: 7 (77.7%) were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo as grade I-II, and 2 (22.2%) as grade III. No disease recurrence or colorectal cancer (CRC) was detected on colonoscopy. Thirty (90.8%) patients completed the 24-month follow-up. A statistically significant difference between preoperative and 24-month QoL index values (median 0.72; IQR = 0.57-0.8 vs. median 0.9; IQR = 0.82-1; p = 0.0003) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The study results demonstrate satisfactory surgical outcomes and a better QoL after surgery. No disease recurrence or CRC was observed at colonoscopy 1 year after surgery.

Abdominal drainage after elective colorectal surgery: propensity score-matched retrospective analysis of an Italian cohort.

BACKGROUND: In Italy, surgeons continue to drain the abdominal cavity in more than 50 per cent of patients after colorectal resection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of abdominal drain placement on early adverse events in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. METHODS: A database was retrospectively analysed through a 1:1 propensity score-matching model including 21 covariates. The primary endpoint was the postoperative duration of stay, and the secondary endpoints were surgical site infections, infectious morbidity rate defined as surgical site infections plus pulmonary infections plus urinary infections, anastomotic leakage, overall morbidity rate, major morbidity rate, reoperation and mortality rates. The results of multiple logistic regression analyses were presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95 per cent c.i. RESULTS: A total of 6157 patients were analysed to produce two well-balanced groups of 1802 patients: group (A), no abdominal drain(s) and group (B), abdominal drain(s). Group A versus group B showed a significantly lower risk of postoperative duration of stay >6 days (OR 0.60; 95 per cent c.i. 0.51-0.70; P < 0.001). A mean postoperative duration of stay difference of 0.86 days was detected between groups. No difference was recorded between the two groups for all the other endpoints. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that placement of abdominal drain(s) after elective colorectal surgery is associated with a non-clinically significant longer (0.86 days) postoperative duration of stay but has no impact on any other secondary outcomes, confirming that abdominal drains should not be used routinely in colorectal surgery.

Mechanical bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery: a propensity score-matched analysis of the Italian colorectal anastomotic leakage (iCral) study group prospective cohorts.

Retrospective evaluation of the effects of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) on data derived from two prospective open-label observational multicenter studies in Italy regarding elective colorectal surgery. MBP for elective colorectal surgery remains a controversial issue with contrasting recommendations in current guidelines. The Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group, therefore, decided to estimate the effects of no MBP (treatment variable) versus MBP for elective colorectal surgery. A total of 8359 patients who underwent colorectal resection with anastomosis were enrolled in two consecutive prospective studies in 78 surgical centers in Italy from January 2019 to September 2021. A retrospective PSMA was performed on 5455 (65.3%) cases after the application of explicit exclusion criteria to eliminate confounders. The primary endpoints were anastomotic leakage (AL) and surgical site infections (SSI) rates; the secondary endpoints included SSI subgroups, overall and major morbidity, reoperation, and mortality rates. Overall length of postoperative hospital stay (LOS) was also considered. Two well-balanced groups of 1125 patients each were generated: group A (No MBP, true population of interest), and group B (MBP, control population), performing a PSMA considering 21 covariates. Group A vs. group B resulted significantly associated with a lower risk of AL [42 (3.5%) vs. 73 (6.0%) events; OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.38-0.84; p = 0.005]. No difference was recorded between the two groups for SSI [73 (6.0%) vs. 85 (7.0%) events; OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.63-1.22; p = 0.441]. Regarding the secondary endpoints, no MBP resulted significantly associated with a lower risk of reoperation and LOS > 6 days. This study confirms that no MBP before elective colorectal surgery is significantly associated with a lower risk of AL, reoperation rate, and LOS < 6 days when compared with MBP.

A Randomized Phase III Trial of Complete Mesocolic Excision Compared with Conventional Surgery for Right Colon Cancer: Interim Analysis of a Nationwide Multicenter Study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network (CoME-in trial).

BACKGROUND: Although complete mesocolic excision (CME) is supposed to be associated with a higher lymph node (LN) yield, decreased local recurrence, and survival improvement, its implementation currently is debated because the evidence level of these data is rather low and still not supported by randomized controlled trials. METHOD: This is a multicenter, randomized, superiority trial (NCT04871399). The 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) was the primary end point of the study. The secondary end points were safety (duration of operation, perioperative complications, hospital length of stay), oncologic outcomes (number of LNs retrieved, 3- and 5-year overall survival, 5-year DFS), and surgery quality (specimen length, area and integrity rate of mesentery, length of ileocolic and middle-colic vessels). The trial design required the LN yield to be higher in the CME group at interim analysis. RESULTS: Interim data analysis is presented in this report. The study enrolled 258 patients in nine referral centers. The number of LNs retrieved was significantly higher after CME (25 vs. 20; p = 0.012). No differences were observed with respect to intra- or post-operative complications, postoperative mortality, or duration of surgery. The hospital stay was even shorter after CME (p = 0.039). Quality of surgery indicators were higher in the CME arm of the study. Survival data still were not available. CONCLUSIONS: Interim data show that CME for right colon cancer in referral centers is safe and feasible and does not increase perioperative complications. The study documented with evidence that quality of surgery and LN yield are higher after CME, and this is essential for continuation of patient recruitment and implementation of an optimal comparison. Trial registration The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with the code NCT04871399 and with the acronym CoME-In trial.

Three-row versus two-row circular staplers for left-sided colorectal anastomosis: a propensity score-matched analysis of the iCral 2 and 3 prospective cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Since most anastomoses after left-sided colorectal resections are performed with a circular stapler, any technological change in stapling devices may influence the incidence of anastomotic adverse events. The aim of the present study was to analyze the effect of a three-row circular stapler on anastomotic leakage and related morbidity after left-sided colorectal resections. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A circular stapled anastomosis was performed in 4255 (50.9%) out of 8359 patients enrolled in two prospective multicenter studies in Italy, and, after exclusion criteria to reduce heterogeneity, 2799 (65.8%) cases were retrospectively analyzed through a 1:1 propensity score-matching model including 20 covariates relative to patient characteristics, to surgery and to perioperative management. Two well-balanced groups of 425 patients each were obtained: group (A) - true population of interest, anastomosis performed with a three-row circular stapler; group (B) - control population, anastomosis performed with a two-row circular stapler. The target of inferences was the average treatment effect in the treated (ATT). The primary endpoints were overall and major anastomotic leakage and overall anastomotic bleeding; the secondary endpoints were overall and major morbidity and mortality rates. The results of multiple logistic regression analyses for the outcomes, including the 20 covariates selected for matching, were presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Group A versus group B showed a significantly lower risk of overall anastomotic leakage (2.1 vs. 6.1%; OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.15-0.73; P =0.006), major anastomotic leakage (2.1 vs. 5.2%; OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.17-0.87; P =0.022), and major morbidity (3.5 vs. 6.6% events; OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.24-0.91; P =0.026). CONCLUSION: The use of three-row circular staplers independently reduced the risk of anastomotic leakage and related morbidity after left-sided colorectal resection. Twenty-five patients were required to avoid one leakage.

Minimally invasive vs. open segmental resection of the splenic flexure for cancer: a nationwide study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology-Colorectal Cancer Network (SICO-CNN).

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the efficacy of minimally invasive (MI) segmental resection of splenic flexure cancer (SFC) is not available, mostly due to the rarity of this tumor. This study aimed to determine the survival outcomes of MI and open treatment, and to investigate whether MI is noninferior to open procedure regarding short-term outcomes. METHODS: This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all consecutive SFC segmental resections performed in 30 referral centers between 2006 and 2016. The primary endpoint assessing efficacy was the overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included cancer-specific mortality (CSM), recurrence rate (RR), short-term clinical outcomes (a composite of Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications and 30-day mortality), and pathological outcomes (a composite of lymph nodes removed ≧12, and proximal and distal free resection margins length ≧ 5 cm). For these composites, a 6% noninferiority margin was chosen based on clinical relevance estimate. RESULTS: A total of 606 patients underwent either an open (208, 34.3%) or a MI (398, 65.7%) SFC segmental resection. At univariable analysis, OS and CSM were improved in the MI group (log-rank test p = 0.004 and Gray's tests p = 0.004, respectively), while recurrences were comparable (Gray's tests p = 0.434). Cox multivariable analysis did not support that OS and CSM were better in the MI group (p = 0.109 and p = 0.163, respectively). Successful pathological outcome, observed in 53.2% of open and 58.3% of MI resections, supported noninferiority (difference 5.1%; 1-sided 95%CI - 4.7% to ∞). Successful short-term clinical outcome was documented in 93.3% of Open and 93.0% of MI procedures, and supported noninferiority as well (difference - 0.3%; 1-sided 95%CI - 5.0% to ∞). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with SFC, the minimally invasive approach met the criterion for noninferiority for postoperative complications and pathological outcomes, and was found to provide results of OS, CSM, and RR comparable to those of open resection.

Laparoscopic Hartmann's reversal has better clinical outcomes compared to open surgery: An international multicenter cohort study involving 502 patients.

Background: Hartmann's procedure (HP) is used in surgical emergencies such as colonic perforation and colonic obstruction. "Temporary" colostomy performed during HP is not always reversed in part due to potential morbidity and mortality associated with reversal. There are several contributing factors for patients requiring a permanent colostomy following HP. Therefore, there is still some discussion about which technique to use. The aim of this study was to evaluate perioperative variables of patients undergoing Hartmann's reversal using a laparoscopic and open approach. Methods: The multicenter retrospective cohort study was done between January 2009 and December 2019 at 14 institutions globally. Patients who underwent Hartmann's reversal laparoscopic (LS) and open (OS) approaches were evaluated and compared. Sociodemographic, preoperative, intraoperative variables, and surgical outcomes were analyzed. The main outcomes evaluated were 30-day mortality, length of stay, complications, and postoperative outcomes. Results: Five hundred and two patients (264 in the LS and 238 in the OS group) were included. The most prevalent sex was male in 53.7%, the most common indication was complicated diverticular disease in 69.9%, and 85% were American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) II-III. Intraoperative complications were noted in 5.3% and 3.4% in the LS and OS groups, respectively. Small bowel injuries were the most common intraoperative injury in 8.3%, with a higher incidence in the OS group compared with the LS group (12.2% vs. 4.9%, p < 0.5). Inadvertent injuries were more common in the small bowel (3%) in the LS group. A total of 17.2% in the OS versus 13.3% in the LS group required intensive care unit (ICU) admission (p = 0.2). The most frequent postoperative complication was ileus (12.6% in OS vs. 9.8% in LS group, p = 0.4)). Reintervention was required mainly in the OS group (15.5% vs. 5.3% in LS group, p < 0.5); mortality rate was 1%. Conclusions: Laparoscopic Hartmann's reversal is safe and feasible, associated with superior clinical outcomes compared with open surgery.

Fistula Between a Primary Sigmoid Large B-Cell Lymphoma and an Ovarian Teratoma.

Primary colorectal lymphoma is a rare neoplasm. We report the case of a fistula between a diffuse large B-cell lymphoma of the sigmoid colon and an ovarian teratoma. An emergent laparotomy for an acute abdomen in a 90-year-old woman was performed. A pelvic mass of 12 × 9 cm fistulized in the left colon was found with the presence of gas and free liquid within the abdomen. This is an extremely rare condition, and as far as we know, no cases of a fistula between a large B-cell colonic lymphoma and an ovarian teratoma are present in the literature.

ERAS program adherence-institutionalization, major morbidity and anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery: the iCral2 multicenter prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs influence morbidity rates and length of stay after colorectal surgery (CRS), and may also impact major complications and anastomotic leakage rates. A prospective multicenter observational study to investigate the interactions between ERAS program adherence and early outcomes after elective CRS was carried out. METHODS: Prospective enrolment of patients submitted to elective CRS with anastomosis in 18 months. Adherence to 21 items of ERAS program was measured upon explicit criteria in every case. After univariate analysis, independent predictors of primary endpoints [major morbidity (MM) and anastomotic leakage (AL) rates] were identified through logistic regression analyses including all significant variables, presenting odds ratios (OR). RESULTS: Institutional ERAS protocol was declared by 27 out of 38 (71.0%) participating centers. Median overall adherence to ERAS program items was 71.4%. Among 3830 patients included in the study, MM and AL rates were 4.7% and 4.2%, respectively. MM rates were independently influenced by intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (OR 7.79, 95% CI 5.46-11.10; p < 0.0001) and standard anesthesia protocol (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48-0.96; p = 0.028). AL rates were independently influenced by male gender (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.06-2.07; p = 0.021), intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (OR 4.29, 95% CI 2.93-6.50; p < 0.0001) and non-standard resections (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.01-2.22; p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: This study disclosed wide room for improvement in compliance to several ERAS program items. It failed to detect any significant association between institutionalization and/or adherence rates to ERAS program with primary endpoints. These outcomes were independently influenced by gender, intra- and postoperative blood transfusions, non-standard resections, and standard anesthesia protocol.

ICG fluorescence imaging in colorectal surgery: a snapshot from the ICRAL study group.

BACKGROUND: Fluorescence-guided visualization is a recently proposed technology in colorectal surgery. Possible uses include evaluating perfusion, navigating lymph nodes and searching for hepatic metastases and peritoneal spread. Despite the absence of high-level evidence, this technique has gained considerable popularity among colorectal surgeons due to its significant reliability, safety, ease of use and relatively low cost. However, the actual use of this technique in daily clinical practice has not been reported to date. METHODS: This survey was conducted on April 2020 among 44 centers dealing with colorectal diseases and participating in the Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group. Surgeons were approximately equally divided based on geographical criteria from multiple Italian regions, with a large proportion based in public (89.1%) and nonacademic (75.7%) centers. They were invited to answer an online survey to snapshot their current behaviors regarding the use of fluorescence-guided visualization in colorectal surgery. Questions regarding technological availability, indications and techniques, personal approaches and feelings were collected in a 23-item questionnaire. RESULTS: Questionnaire replies were received from 37 institutions and partially answered by 8, as this latter group of centers do not implement fluorescence technology (21.6%). Out of the remaining 29 centers (78,4%), fluorescence is utilized in all laparoscopic colorectal resections by 72.4% of surgeons and only for selected cases by the remaining 27.6%, while 62.1% of respondents do not use fluorescence in open surgery (unless the perfusion is macroscopically uncertain with the naked eye, in which case 41.4% of them do). The survey also suggests that there is no agreement on dilution, dosing and timing, as many different practices are adopted based on personal judgment. Only approximately half of the surgeons reported a reduced leak rate with fluorescence perfusion assessment, but 65.5% of them strongly believe that this technique will become a minimum requirement for colorectal surgery in the future. CONCLUSION: The survey confirms that fluorescence is becoming a widely used technique in colorectal surgery. However, both the indications and methods still vary considerably; furthermore, the surgeons' perceptions of the results are insufficient to consider this technology essential. This survey emphasizes the need for further research to reach recommendations based on solid scientific evidence.

Right sided diverticulitis in western countries: A review.

BACKGROUND: Although the treatment guidelines for left sided diverticulitis are clear, the management of right colonic diverticulitis is not well established. This disease can no longer be ignored due to significant spread throughout Asia. AIM: To analyse epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment of right-sided diverticulitis in western countries. METHODS: MEDLINE and PubMed searches were performed using the key words "right-sided diverticulitis'', ''right colon diverticulitis'', ''caecal diverticulitis'', ''ascending colon diverticulitis'' and ''caecum diverticula'' in order to find relevant articles published until 2021. RESULTS: A total of 18 studies with 422 patients were found. Correct diagnosis was made only in 32.2%, mostly intraoperatively or via CT scan. The main reason for misdiagnosis was a suspected acute appendicitis (56.8%). The treatment was a non-operative management (NOM) in 184 patients (43.6%) and surgical in 238 patients (56.4%), seven of which after NOM failure. Recurrence rate was low (5.45%), similar to eastern studies and inferior to left -sided diverticulitis. Recurrent patients were successfully conservatively retreated in most cases. CONCLUSION: The management of right- sided diverticulitis is not well clarified in the western world and no selective guidelines have been considered even if principles are similar to those with left- sided diverticulitis. Wrong diagnosis is one of the most important problems and CT scan seems to be the best imaging modality. NOM offers a safe and effective treatment; surgery should be considered only in cases of complicated diverticulitis or if malignancy cannot be excluded. Further studies are needed to clarify the correct treatment.

Operative versus non-operative management in acute surgical diseases during COVID-19 pandemic: a 30-day experience from an Italian hospital in Lombardy.

The spread of COVID-19 pandemic has determined a huge imbalance between real clinical needs of the population and effective resources availability. The aim of this study was to report how this situation forces surgeons to consider a non-operative management as an alternative. This is a retrospective monocentric study and we collected data from 60 patients, split in two groups: info from Group A, 28 patients (11 March to 11 April 2020) were compared with info from group B, 32 patients (11 March to 11 April 2019). The most relevant difference between the groups is related to patient's clinical management. The two groups had a considerably different number of cases that were treated with an operative management: 18 cases (64,7%) in group A vs. 28 cases (87,5%) in group B. Otherwise, non-operative approach occurred in 10 cases (35,7%) in group A and only in 4 patients (12,5%) in group B. These data suggest that the drastic reduction of means narrows the range of therapeutic choices. Indeed, in this emergency scenario, the rationing of healthcare resources was the propelling for surgeons to consider alternative therapeutic pathways.

Colorectal surgery in Italy during the Covid19 outbreak: a survey from the iCral study group.

BACKGROUND: The COVID19 pandemic had a deep impact on healthcare facilities in Italy, with profound reorganization of surgical activities. The Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group collecting 43 Italian surgical centers experienced in colorectal surgery from multiple regions performed a quick survey to make a snapshot of the current situation. METHODS: A 25-items questionnaire was sent to the 43 principal investigators of the iCral study group, with questions regarding qualitative and quantitative aspects of the surgical activity before and after the COVID19 outbreak. RESULTS: Two-thirds of the centers were involved in the treatment of COVID19 cases. Intensive care units (ICU) beds were partially or totally reallocated for the treatment of COVID19 cases in 72% of the hospitals. Elective colorectal surgery for malignancy was stopped or delayed in nearly 30% of the centers, with less than 20% of them still scheduling elective colorectal resections for frail and comorbid patients needing postoperative ICU care. A significant reduction of the number of colorectal resections during the time span from January to March 2020 was recorded, with significant delay in treatment in more than 50% of the centers. DISCUSSION: Our survey confirms that COVID19 outbreak is severely affecting the activity of colorectal surgery centers participating to iCral study group. This could impact the activity of surgical centers for many months after the end of the emergency.

Computed tomography in suspected anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery: evaluating mortality rates after false-negative imaging.

PURPOSES: We sought to investigate the accuracy of abdominal CT scanning for anastomotic leakage and the effect of false-negative scans on the delay in therapeutic intervention and clinical outcome. METHOD: Data from a prospectively bi-institutionally maintained database of all patients who underwent elective colorectal surgery with primary anastomosis for malignant or benign disease between 2010 and 2017 were reviewed. Patients with confirmed anastomotic dehiscence at reintervention who underwent a postoperative CT scan for suspected leakage were identified and radiological reports were retrieved. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients with anastomotic dehiscence were included in the study. American Society of Anesthesiologists score, sex, type of surgical procedure, malignancy, and type of anastomosis do not correlate with postoperative false-negative CT imaging. Postoperative false-negative CT scan, however, led to delayed reintervention (3 vs. 6 h, p = 0.023) and increased mortality (five deaths vs. no deaths, p = 0.043). Free abdominal air (p = 0.001) and extraluminal contrast extravasation (p = 0.001) were found to be predictive of accuracy in anastomotic leakage diagnosis. CONCLUSION: The suboptimal specificity of a postoperative CT scan in suspected anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery can delay reintervention and increase mortality.

Intracorporeal Versus Extracorporeal Anastomosis for Laparoscopic Resection of the Splenic Flexure Colon Cancer: A Multicenter Propensity Score Analysis.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to compare the short and long-term outcomes of intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) versus extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) during laparoscopic resection of splenic flexure for cancer, in 3 high-volume Italian centers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on a multicenter database of a consecutive series of patients who underwent an elective laparoscopic resection of the splenic flexure for colon cancer in 3 high-volume centers between January 2008 and August 2017. Propensity score matching analysis was performed to overcome patients' selection bias between the 2 surgical techniques. Data on patients' demographics, operative details, short-term and long-term outcomes were prospectively recorded. RESULTS: In total, 102 patients were selected. After propensity score match, 72 patients were compared: 36 for the IA group, 36 for the EA group. The IA group showed a significantly shorter median time to first flatus, time to first stool, time to oral feeding, and time to discharge, as well as significantly lower incidence of postoperative severe surgical complications, especially in terms of wound infections, and of incisional hernia (IH).Risk factors for IH on logistic regression were longer operative time, EA, longer incision, postoperative blood transfusions, and longer specimen. CONCLUSIONS: The IA in laparoscopic resection of the splenic flexure is feasible and safe in terms of short-term and long-term outcomes. Major advantages are shorter time to first flatus and first stool, complete oral feeding and time to discharge, with minor incidence of severe surgical complications, such as wound infection, and lower incidence of IH.

Laparoscopic lavage and drainage for Hinchey III diverticulitis: review of technical aspects.

The surgical treatment for patients with generalized peritonitis complicating sigmoid diverticulitis is currently debated; particularly in case of diffuse purulent contamination (Hinchey 3). Laparoscopic lavage and drainage (LLD) has been proposed by some authors as a safe and effective alternative to single- or multi-stage resective surgery. However, among all the different studies on LLD, there is no uniformity in terms of surgical technique adopted and data show significant differences in postoperative outcomes. Aim of this review was to analyze the differences and similarities among the authors in terms of application, surgical technique and outcomes of LLD in Hinchey 3 patients. A bibliographical research was performed by referring to PubMed and Cochrane. "Purulent peritonitis", "Hinchey 3 diverticulitis", "acute diverticulitis", "colonic perforation" and "complicated diverticulitis" were used as key words. Twenty-eight papers were selected, excluding meta-analysis, reviews and case reports with a very small number of patients. The aim of this review was to establish how LLD should be done, suggesting important technical tricks. We found agreement in terms of indications, preoperative management, ports' positioning, antibiotics, enteral feeding and drain management. On the contrast, different statements regarding indications, adhesiolysis and management of colonic hole and failure of laparoscopic lavage are reported. A widespread diffusion of LLD and standardization of its technique are impossible because of data heterogeneity and selection bias in the limited RCTs. It is necessary to wait for long terms results from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in progress to establish the efficacy and safety of this technique. More importantly, an increased number of highly skilled and dedicated colorectal laparoscopic surgeons are required to standardized the procedure.

Robotic pelvic dissection as surgical treatment of complicated diverticulitis in elective settings: a comparative study with fully laparoscopic procedure.

BACKGROUND: Recently, minimally invasive treatment of complicated sigmoid diverticulitis is becoming a valid alternative to standard procedures. Robotic approach may be useful to allow more precise dissection in arduous pelvic dissection as in complicated diverticulitis. The aim of this study is to investigate effectiveness, potential benefits and short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgical resection, compared with fully laparoscopic resection in complicated diverticulitis. METHODS: Between January 2009 and December 2017, 156 consecutive patients with history of complicated diverticular disease were referred to our Department of General, Mininvasive and Robotic Surgery. All patients underwent elective colonic resections performed by the same colorectal surgeon and followed a perioperative ERAS program. Demographic and clinical features, surgical data, postoperative data, 30-day morbidity and mortality, VAS for surgeon's compliance were evaluated. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-six consecutive patients underwent elective colonic resection: 92 fully laparoscopic (FL) colorectal resections and 64 procedures with robotic hybrid approach (RHA). Conversion rate was none in the RHA group versus 6.5% in the FL group, because of poor vision due to bowel distension, inflammatory pseudotumor and peritoneal adhesions. No 30-day mortality was observed. Mean operative time was 167.5 ± 54.4 min (80-420) in the FL group and 172.5 ± 55.64 min (110-325) in the RHA group (p 0.079), mean intraoperative blood loss was 144.6 ± 40.6 ml (40-200) with the FL technique and 138.4 ± 28.3 ml (20-185) with the RHA (p 0.295). Mean hospital stay for FL was 5 ± 4.1 days (range 3-45) and 5 ± 2.7 days (range 3-20) for RHA (p 0.974). Overall postoperative morbidity rate was 21.6% in the FL group and 12.3% in the RHA (p 0.067). Major postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3 and 4) represented 13% and 4.6%, respectively (p 0.091). VAS for surgeon's compliance revealed a better performance in the robotic arm (p 0.059). CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study highlights the potential benefits of robotic-assisted laparoscopy in colorectal resections for complicated diverticular disease in terms of surgical efficacy, postoperative morbidity and better surgeon's compliance.